The Constitutional History II On The United States

In The Gay Marriage Case, Obergefell v Hodges, the United States Supreme Court decided that a state may not prohibit same-sex marriage. Instead, it emphasized that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to the gay society through the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment of the United States of America Constitution. The involved decision maker in the case was Justice Anthony Kennedy, who gave four primary reasons for his decision.

“While the authors of the United States Constitution are frequently portrayed as noble and idealistic statesmen who drafted a document based upon their conception of good government, reality is that the constitution reflects the politics of the drafting and ratification process. Unfortunately, the result is a document that is designed to produce an ineffective government, rather than a government that can respond to issues in a timely fashion.” In support of this conclusion, the issues of slavery, The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, and the civil rights struggle keenly demonstrate the ways in which our constitution hinders the expediency and effectiveness of America’s government. The constitution’s provisions towards voting eligibility and

A constitution is a written document that sets forth the fundamental rules by which a society is governed. Throughout the course of history the United States has lived under two Constitutions since the British-American colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. First in line was the Articles of Confederation (1789-1789) followed by the Constitution of United States of America (1789-present). The Articles of Confederation was the first formal written Constitution of America that specified how the national government was to operate. Unfortunately, the Articles did not last long. Under the words of the Article’s power was limited; Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. Also the articles stated

In Obergefell v. Hodges, the United States Supreme Court held that same sex couples can now exercise the fundamental right of marriage nationwide. Justice Kennedy reached this result by redefining what marriage is.

Refer to Table 1-1 of The American Democracy, and in 100 to 150 words, identify and explain America’s 3 core political ideals and the 3 rules of American politics.

The case Obergefell vs. Hodges reached the United States Supreme Court in 2015 (Oyez). This case dealt with the rights of same-sex marriages and became important case in our nation’s young history and in our society in general. The problem was groups of same-sex couples were being told that their marriage licenses were not being upheld to the same legal standards as those of heterogeneous couples. Therefore same-sex couples in Ohio, Tennessee , Kentucky, and Michigan went and sued these agencies in challenge of their constitutional rights (Oyez).They took their issue to court because they believed that the states were denying them their 14th amendment rights without due process. They couldn’t understand why their marriages license were not

The plan to divide the government into three branches was proposed by James Madison, at the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He modeled the division from who he referred to as ‘the Perfect Governor,’ as he read Isaiah 33:22; “For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king; He will save us.” http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm

The SCOTUS gets requests to take on over 7000 cases each year and only accept about 80 of those to actually hear. The arguments they choose to hear address constitutional issues or federal law in most cases. The Obergefell V Hodges case in the eyes of most people is that about legalizing Gay Marriage, but it is a much deeper case rooted in death benefits for a Mr. Obergefell from the passing of his partner Mr. Arthur.

Justice Scalia argued that the question of whether same-sex marriage should be recognized is one for the state legislatures, and that for the issue to be decided by unelected judges goes against one of the most basic precepts of the Constitution: that political change should occur through the votes of elected representatives. In taking on this policymaking role, the majority opinion departed from established Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence to create a right where none exists in the Constitution. Justice Thomas joined in the dissent. Justice Thomas also wrote a separate dissent in which he argued that the majority opinion stretched the doctrine of substantive due process rights found in the Fourteenth Amendment too far and in doing so distorted the democratic process by taking power from the legislature and putting it in the hands of the judiciary. Additionally, the legislative history of the Due Process Clause in both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments indicates that they were meant to protect people from physical restraint and from government intervention, but they do not grant them rights to government entitlements. Justice Thomas also argued that the majority opinion impermissibly infringed on religious freedom by legislating from the bench rather than allowing the state legislature to determine how best to address the competing rights and interests at stake. Justice Scalia joined in the dissent. In his separate dissent, Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. wrote that the Constitution does not address the right of same-sex couples to marry, and therefore the issue is reserved to the states to decide whether to depart from the traditional definition of marriage. By allowing a majority of the Court to create a new

In the initial years of the United States a meeting of delegates appointed by the several states met for the sole purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. The result of this meeting was the creation of the U.S. Constitution that would soon become the ultimate directive for both Federal and State Governments. Since its birth it has been revised, amended, and ratified in order to solidify the allocation of power between the separate branches of government. Although this may be the case, distribution of the powers has been disputed ever since the formation of the Constitution. These political, legal, and quasi-legal constitutional disputes triggered civil unrest and led to explicit acts of opposition involving nullification and

According to DOMA, “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife” (sec 3). Until recently 2013, the US Supreme Court finally delivered the verdict that declared section 3 of the DOMA, which is the rejection of right to gay marriage is unconstitutional (Shapiro 208). In “Gay Marriage Is A Fundamental Right” by Nathan Goetting, “The right to many, and to marry the person of one's choice, is a fundamental right and a necessary aspect of human happiness. This has been an explicitly stated abiding principle since the Court used its power of judicial review to strike down as unconstitutional a legislature's definition of marriage in 1967.” Currently, 17 states in the United States have legalized the right to same sex marriage. The realization of DOMA is unconstitutional has further evidenced that gay marriage is one of the civil right that should not be taken away by the government, and it is an inevitable changes that open doors for equality and equity.

Gay marriage has been in hot debate for a while now. What once was shunned in almost every culture and society is now creeping into our laws and customs as normal and even acceptable due to the increase of radicals found in Anglo-Saxon societies such as the US and UK. Fueled by the recent revolutions of women and interracial groups, homosexuals (a group less than 1 percent of the world’s population), have finally taken a stand. Marriage has been a union of opposite sexes for nearly 5000 years and now has come into such scrutiny that it has taken on the attention of the Supreme Court. On April 28th, 2015, the Supreme Court began the case of Obergefell v. Hodge, the dispute which would settle the legalization of gay marriage in the entire US. From such a case, the question arises: “Should gay marriage be legalized in the United States?” After analyzing the points on both sides of the feud, I came to the clear conclusion that the answer was no, gay marriage should become and continue to be illegal in the United States.

Obergefell v. Hodges was the Supreme Court case of 2015, which ultimately granted equal marriage rights to same-sex couples. Obergefell was arguing in favor of equal marriage rights, while Hodges had an opposing argument. This case was brought to the Supreme Court after the state of Ohio refused to put a married status on the death certificate of James Obergefell’s late husband in 2013. Theodore Wymyslo, James Obergefell’s defendant in the original Ohio case, appealed the ruling against Obergefell, which led to the case being pushed to higher courts throughout 2014, eventually reaching the Supreme Court in 2015 (LGBT Rights on the Docket). In the Obergefell v. Hodges case, Obergefell’s side discussed topics such as the expansion of marriage and gay rights, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the undeniable rights associated with marriage in their argument. Hodges’ side, however, had much weaker arguments, such as same-sex marriages will ruin the reputation of marriage, and religious views are conflicting of the premise of same-sex marriage. Taking a more extensive look into both sides of this case proves to be very interesting and thought provoking.

On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that denying the fundamental institution of marriage to same-sex couples violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment says that states must provide equal protection of the laws for all of their citizens. It also guarantees that no person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and

In 2015 the Supreme Court ruled on a case about same-sex marriage, Obergfell v. Hodges. The final ruling (holding) of the case, stated by SCOTUSBlog, the fourteenth amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same-sex and also to recognize a marriage between two people of the same-sex when their marriage was lawfully licensed and performed